Jump to content
stitches

PFF Final Big Board for the 2019 NFL Draft

Recommended Posts

Seems like PFF have published their final board for the draft. You can find it here:

https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/draft-pffs-top-250-big-board-for-the-2019-nfl-draft

 

Some notables:

-Here's their top 10:

BIG-BOARD-1-768x432.png

- Byron Murphy higher than I've seen anyone have him anywhere else - no. 6

- Jerry Tillery higher than I've seen anyone else have him anywhere else - no. 7

- Jeffery Simmons and Greedy Williams make the top 10 too...

- Dalton Risner above Cody Ford and Greg Little

- JJ Arcega Whiteside at 23(higher than I've seen him anywhere else)

- Christian Wilkins at 25... 

- Nasir Adderley and Darnell Savage are their first two safeties(top 30)

- Chase Winovich no. 29... they really like him. High production, high grades, good athleticism...  

- Andy Isabella no. 30 - another one that is higher than I've seen him anywhere else

- David Long - no. 33 ... they think he's the second best press-man specific corner in the draft (after Greedy)

- Noah Fant - no. 43... this seems like lower than I've seen him elsewhere

- Amani Hooker no. 44 - no.4 safety on their board... 

- Montez Sweat no. 46 - lowest I've seen him, I don't get this one.

- Khalen Saunders no. 47... putting it here because we recently had a thread about him. good player iMO

- Rashan Gary no. 48 - lowest I've seen him ranked

- Chauncey Gardner Johnson - no 49... this seems kind of low

- Max Scharping - no. 50... they like him as an OT prospect

- Hjalte Froholdt - 55 - sleeper guard prospect

- Blake Cashman -59 - LB3? 

- Ronheen Bingham 63... higher than i've seen him. 

- Mack Wilason no. 127 ?? Lowest I've seen him

- Parris Campbell at 96... 

- Jachai Polite at 98

- Johnathan Abram 112

- Trayvon Mullen 160 !!

- Lonnie  Johnson 161 !!

 

 

What are your impressions of their board? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That looks crazy. But I think a big board can be different then where someone is drafted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's my attempt at a mock draft for the Colts using their board on fanspeak's draft simulator:

 

1: R1P26

DL JEFFERY SIMMONS

MISSISSIPPI STATE

 

2: R2P2

EDGE RASHAN GARY

MICHIGAN

 

3: R2P27

S CHAUNCEY GARDNER-JOHNSON

FLORIDA

 

4: R3P25

WR MILES BOYKIN

NOTRE DAME

 

5: R4P27

Te JACE STERNBERGER

TEXAS A&M

 

6: R4P33

RB DARRELL HENDERSON

MEMPHIS

 

7: R5P26

LB BOBBY OKEREKE

STANFORD

 

8: R6P26

CB KRIS BOYD

TEXAS

 

9: R7P26

WR PENNY HART

GEORGIA STATE

 

14 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

That looks crazy. But I think a big board can be different then where someone is drafted.

This is not a mock draft. It's how they view the prospects. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, stitches said:

Here's my attempt at a mock draft for the Colts using their board on fanspeak's draft simulator:

 

1: R1P26

DL JEFFERY SIMMONS

MISSISSIPPI STATE

 

2: R2P2

EDGE RASHAN GARY

MICHIGAN

 

3: R2P27

S CHAUNCEY GARDNER-JOHNSON

FLORIDA

 

4: R3P25

WR MILES BOYKIN

NOTRE DAME

 

5: R4P27

Te JACE STERNBERGER

TEXAS A&M

 

6: R4P33

RB DARRELL HENDERSON

MEMPHIS

 

7: R5P26

LB BOBBY OKEREKE

STANFORD

 

8: R6P26

CB KRIS BOYD

TEXAS

 

9: R7P26

WR PENNY HART

GEORGIA STATE

 

This is not a mock draft. It's how they view the prospects. 

If we got both Gary and Simmons omg. There seems to be a lot of players they think are dropping. I also saw sweat could be dropping because of the heart issue. Some of that might be because other teams want them to drop so they can get them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sweat is dropping due to the discovery (or disclosure) of a previously unreported heart condition. I haven't seen any detail on what condition they're talking about, and how it might affect his ability to play, but he is no longer planning to be in Nashville for the draft. If it's serious enough, he might drop off every team's boards. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, stitches said:

Seems like PFF have published their final board for the draft. You can find it here:

https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/draft-pffs-top-250-big-board-for-the-2019-nfl-draft

 

Some notables:

-Here's their top 10:

BIG-BOARD-1-768x432.png

- Byron Murphy higher than I've seen anyone have him anywhere else - no. 6

- Jerry Tillery higher than I've seen anyone else have him anywhere else - no. 7

- Jeffery Simmons and Greedy Williams make the top 10 too...

- Dalton Risner above Cody Ford and Greg Little

- JJ Arcega Whiteside at 23(higher than I've seen him anywhere else)

- Christian Wilkins at 25... 

- Nasir Adderley and Darnell Savage are their first two safeties(top 30)

- Chase Winovich no. 29... they really like him. High production, high grades, good athleticism...  

- Andy Isabella no. 30 - another one that is higher than I've seen him anywhere else

- David Long - no. 33 ... they think he's the second best press-man specific corner in the draft (after Greedy)

- Noah Fant - no. 43... this seems like lower than I've seen him elsewhere

- Amani Hooker no. 44 - no.4 safety on their board... 

- Montez Sweat no. 46 - lowest I've seen him, I don't get this one.

- Khalen Saunders no. 47... putting it here because we recently had a thread about him. good player iMO

- Rashan Gary no. 48 - lowest I've seen him ranked

- Chauncey Gardner Johnson - no 49... this seems kind of low

- Max Scharping - no. 50... they like him as an OT prospect

- Hjalte Froholdt - 55 - sleeper guard prospect

- Blake Cashman -59 - LB3? 

- Ronheen Bingham 63... higher than i've seen him. 

- Mack Wilason no. 127 ?? Lowest I've seen him

- Parris Campbell at 96... 

- Jachai Polite at 98

- Johnathan Abram 112

- Trayvon Mullen 160 !!

- Lonnie  Johnson 161 !!

 

 

What are your impressions of their board? 

 

 

I like their work on the NFL level.  But NOT a fan of their on the college level.

 

Is that diplomatic enough?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, HarryTheCat said:

Sweat is dropping due to the discovery (or disclosure) of a previously unreported heart condition. I haven't seen any detail on what condition they're talking about, and how it might affect his ability to play, but he is no longer planning to be in Nashville for the draft. If it's serious enough, he might drop off every team's boards. 

All the he doctors have said it is virtually no risk. But teams are still probably concerned. He was allowed to participate at the combine so the risk is very minimal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Montez Sweat (cardiomegaly, cause undisclosed)

 

 
Depends upon the team doctor and his comfort level with such a player in that condition.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, stitches said:

Seems like PFF have published their final board for the draft. You can find it here:

https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/draft-pffs-top-250-big-board-for-the-2019-nfl-draft

 

Some notables:

-Here's their top 10:

BIG-BOARD-1-768x432.png

- Byron Murphy higher than I've seen anyone have him anywhere else - no. 6

- Jerry Tillery higher than I've seen anyone else have him anywhere else - no. 7

- Jeffery Simmons and Greedy Williams make the top 10 too...

- Dalton Risner above Cody Ford and Greg Little

- JJ Arcega Whiteside at 23(higher than I've seen him anywhere else)

- Christian Wilkins at 25... 

- Nasir Adderley and Darnell Savage are their first two safeties(top 30)

- Chase Winovich no. 29... they really like him. High production, high grades, good athleticism...  

- Andy Isabella no. 30 - another one that is higher than I've seen him anywhere else

- David Long - no. 33 ... they think he's the second best press-man specific corner in the draft (after Greedy)

- Noah Fant - no. 43... this seems like lower than I've seen him elsewhere

- Amani Hooker no. 44 - no.4 safety on their board... 

- Montez Sweat no. 46 - lowest I've seen him, I don't get this one.

- Khalen Saunders no. 47... putting it here because we recently had a thread about him. good player iMO

- Rashan Gary no. 48 - lowest I've seen him ranked

- Chauncey Gardner Johnson - no 49... this seems kind of low

- Max Scharping - no. 50... they like him as an OT prospect

- Hjalte Froholdt - 55 - sleeper guard prospect

- Blake Cashman -59 - LB3? 

- Ronheen Bingham 63... higher than i've seen him. 

- Mack Wilason no. 127 ?? Lowest I've seen him

- Parris Campbell at 96... 

- Jachai Polite at 98

- Johnathan Abram 112

- Trayvon Mullen 160 !!

- Lonnie  Johnson 161 !!

 

 

What are your impressions of their board? 

 

If Tillery is there at 26, we should take him. I can see him being the best DT in this class if his heart is in football (which is up to Ballard to decide).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I like their work on the NFL level.  But NOT a fan of their on the college level.

 

Is that diplomatic enough?

 

As far as I know, they use the same process for their NFL evaluations as they do for their college evaluations. 

 

Now the additional component here is the projection, because their NFL grades are descriptive of the performance, while the draft big boards are predictive, which of course adds some uncertainty and projection about the prospects transition into the league. 

 

I would love to see their correlation numbers(but they are not public so...) because they've been introducing some new things into their projections - for example, they've said they've been studying what translates from college to NFL and what doesn't... for example - pass-blocking for OTs seem to translate better than run-blocking ... clean pocket passing translates and is more stable than off-script plays for the QBs, pressures/win%/college grade translate more than sacks for DL, etc. Then you add athleticism to the mix... and things can get murky. 

 

In general my biggest beef with their boards has been that they seem to overemphasize what the player is right now and don't seem to put enough emphasis on developmental upside. Although... as I say that I look at DK Metcalf being their no. 1 ranked WR while sporting a grade of about 70... (while most other projected day 1 and day 2 receivers are in the 80-90 range), so... maybe they've been changing their projections a bit... I don't know. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/20/2019 at 12:36 PM, stitches said:

Here's my attempt at a mock draft for the Colts using their board on fanspeak's draft simulator:

 

1: R1P26

DL JEFFERY SIMMONS

MISSISSIPPI STATE

 

2: R2P2

EDGE RASHAN GARY

MICHIGAN

 

3: R2P27

S CHAUNCEY GARDNER-JOHNSON

FLORIDA

 

4: R3P25

WR MILES BOYKIN

NOTRE DAME

 

5: R4P27

Te JACE STERNBERGER

TEXAS A&M

 

6: R4P33

RB DARRELL HENDERSON

MEMPHIS

 

7: R5P26

LB BOBBY OKEREKE

STANFORD

 

8: R6P26

CB KRIS BOYD

TEXAS

 

9: R7P26

WR PENNY HART

GEORGIA STATE

 

This is not a mock draft. It's how they view the prospects. 

 

 

Just did one with their board that I'd be ecstatic about.  4 rounds only. 

 

26: R1P26

DL CHRISTIAN WILKINS

CLEMSON

 

34: R2P2

S DARNELL SAVAGE

MARYLAND

 

59: R2P27

OT KALEB MCGARY

WASHINGTON

 

89: R3P25

WR MILES BOYKIN

NOTRE DAME

 

129: R4P27

Te JACE STERNBERGER

TEXAS A&M

 

135: R4P33

LB MACK WILSON

ALABAMA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, stitches said:

As far as I know, they use the same process for their NFL evaluations as they do for their college evaluations. 

 

Now the additional component here is the projection, because their NFL grades are descriptive of the performance, while the draft big boards are predictive, which of course adds some uncertainty and projection about the prospects transition into the league. 

 

I would love to see their correlation numbers(but they are not public so...) because they've been introducing some new things into their projections - for example, they've said they've been studying what translates from college to NFL and what doesn't... for example - pass-blocking for OTs seem to translate better than run-blocking ... clean pocket passing translates and is more stable than off-script plays for the QBs, pressures/win%/college grade translate more than sacks for DL, etc. Then you add athleticism to the mix... and things can get murky. 

 

In general my biggest beef with their boards has been that they seem to overemphasize what the player is right now and don't seem to put enough emphasis on developmental upside. Although... as I say that I look at DK Metcalf being their no. 1 ranked WR while sporting a grade of about 70... (while most other projected day 1 and day 2 receivers are in the 80-90 range), so... maybe they've been changing their projections a bit... I don't know. 

 

 

I'm sure you're right....   that they use the same grading system.   But I wonder if they should be?

 

Let me see if I can elaborate....

 

On the NFL level...    it's the best vs. the best.   Grown man vs. grown man.    Every game carries equal weight.    I believe the scores a player gets vs Arizona are just as important as the grades they get vs. New England.    That's my understanding.

 

On the college level,  I believe it's the same.   The grades a Stanford player gets in a game vs. Notre Dame counts just the same as a game vs an opponent that might go 1-11.   All the same.

 

But should it be?    On the college level,  teams have a handful of top level games....  but they also play a number of cup cakes.   And the competition level is highly inferior.   So a good player on the college level can pad grades,  get great grades vs a highly inferior opponent.   I suspect that happens a lot.   Does PFF make any allowances for the difference in the quality of opponents?   If Player A plays in the SEC and Player B plays in a very weak conference (you choose) and they have the same grade at the end of the year --- should they?    Do they adjust for the difficulty of schedule?     I often wonder.     When I see players from smaller schools have high grades, I confess to wondering if that's an appropriate grade?

 

A lot of  what I've written is just Thinking Out Loud...    Perhaps someone will chime in with new information?     But they've got so many question marks for me on this list,  and do every year they'v made a college list,  that I'm left to scratch my head....       :scratch:

 

p.s. -- I think you alluded to an important point.     Grading a college player on PRODUCTION vs PROJECTION.      What you HAVE done vs. what you MIGHT do.     That's a very difficult aspect and I suspect is often the difference between a good choice and a bust....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It scares me seeing all those DT's ranked so high. I am really hoping for that position at either 26 or 34.  That was the missing piece during the Manning years. I don't want to go through that again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I'm sure you're right....   that they use the same grading system.   But I wonder if they should be?

 

Let me see if I can elaborate....

 

On the NFL level...    it's the best vs. the best.   Grown man vs. grown man.    Every game carries equal weight.    I believe the scores a player gets vs Arizona are just as important as the grades they get vs. New England.    That's my understanding.

 

On the college level,  I believe it's the same.   The grades a Stanford player gets in a game vs. Notre Dame counts just the same as a game vs an opponent that might go 1-11.   All the same.

 

But should it be?    On the college level,  teams have a handful of top level games....  but they also play a number of cup cakes.   And the competition level is highly inferior.   So a good player on the college level can pad grades,  get great grades vs a highly inferior opponent.   I suspect that happens a lot.   Does PFF make any allowances for the difference in the quality of opponents?   If Player A plays in the SEC and Player B plays in a very weak conference (you choose) and they have the same grade at the end of the year --- should they?    Do they adjust for the difficulty of schedule?     I often wonder.     When I see players from smaller schools have high grades, I confess to wondering if that's an appropriate grade?

 

A lot of  what I've written is just Thinking Out Loud...    Perhaps someone will chime in with new information?     But they've got so many question marks for me on this list,  and do every year they'v made a college list,  that I'm left to scratch my head....       

 

p.s. -- I think you alluded to an important point.     Grading a college player on PRODUCTION vs PROJECTION.      What you HAVE done vs. what you MIGHT do.     That's a very difficult aspect and I suspect is often the difference between a good choice and a bust....

In the grade itself they don't take into account the level of competition(just like they don't do it in NFL no matter if your OT has faced Khalil Mack in the game or Tarell Basham). They just evaluate what's happening on the field. I think the place where they do put context on those grades is on their board. For example they have this small school gem Ronheen Bingham from Arkansas State. He blows up in their grading(I think he was the 2nd or 3d highest grade for EDGE rusher they gave this season). The place where they input the level of competition that grade was achieved against is on their big board and thus he's not ranked in the top 10, but rather in the 60s... so even though he was one of the highest graded players for them this season he's a 3d rounder on their board. 

 

I've heard them talk about Andy Isabella and that he always performed well against top opponents(200 yards and 2 TDs vs Georgia, 200 yards and TD vs SFU, 100 and TD vs Boston College, etc)... so I guess they take that into account too when they rank him this high. 

 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Real NBA pundits, coaches and execs were parroting "Jump shooting teams cannot win in the NBA" and "You need low post presence to win" just like... 5-10 years ago. Data and analysis about the value of the 3 has been available for close to 20 years. You underestimate just how married people are to their old ways and how hard it is to teach the old dog new tricks, especially when this is all they've known for their whole lives and now you are telling them what they've been taught for 20-30-50 years is wrong. Some will adapt and flourish, most won't...    My favorite quote that encapsulates perfectly the situation comes from a field that is MUCH more open to new ideas than football - science. And even there, there is a long history of resistance to new ideas. Physicist Max Planck once said "Science advances one funeral at a time". What he meant was that science doesn't advance by convincing the old guard that the new ideas are correct, but by the old timers just dying out and the new generation unburdened by emotional attachments to the old stuff being allowed to just follow where the evidence points to.    BTW I do NOT think the run game is meaningless or that it doesn't have a role to play in today's game. It is extremely important in situational football, in end of game situations, in goalline and 3d and 4th and short situations, etc. I just do not think it serves anyone any good perpetuating myths about its importance for things that have been repeatedly shown to not correlate to run-game success.     
    • For those that wanted Suh, hes off the board.   https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2019/05/21/ndamukong-suh-expected-to-sign-with-buccaneers/
    • The problem is the secondary is really hard to watch from the angles we are getting on TV and the fans general population doesn't dissect in detail what's happening ... they just see the big plays - the interceptions, the big pass-breakups, or a big missed tackle etc... they don't see when the QB doesn't even throw the ball because of perfect coverage or threat of playmaking by players like Hooker. The real insane stat here is 1 reception per 130 snaps... that's like ... once every 2.5 games or thereabout... there is a value to what Hooker provides both as a playmaker and as a deterrent for opposing QB's even thinking about throwing deep. 
    • My gripe with Stitches view is these coaches have access to this same data that you're quoting. They have all kinds of stat men in the building with them.  I don't think they are oblivious to any of this stuff.  Then you've got actual football coaches in this forum like Coffedrinker and Princeton Tiger and very few of them really down play the importance of running the football and what it does for your passing game.  I just can't buy that all of them are just merely being stubborn and ignoring the data for age long myths.  I think there's a better reason why coaches still keep that mantra.
    • he got off to a slow start last year, but everyone had to notice his interception on eli and his solid play overall by the end of the year   fans just go by what they see, and that can change a lot week to week. 
  • Members

    • ColtsBlueFL

      ColtsBlueFL 5,321

      Moderators
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Beizy317

      Beizy317 18

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Dingus McGirt

      Dingus McGirt 805

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • William3112

      William3112 1

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • KB

      KB 381

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • krunk

      krunk 10,987

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • PeterBowman

      PeterBowman 2,777

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • stitches

      stitches 5,223

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • That Guy

      That Guy 798

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Scott Pennock

      Scott Pennock 1,494

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...